Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[AnotherLLer]

A little long post but very interesting insights.

https://ibb.co/nzJS6NZ

The link contains the drawing of a 6 feet man with ideal proportions. You can see his various measurements with mm precision.

Now, I want to point out the most interesting measurements for someone considering LL.

1. The distance from sternal notch to relaxed navel.

2. The distance from relaxed navel to ground.

3. The distance from sternal notch to lower end of buttocks.

4. The distance from floor to lower end of buttocks.

For an ideal 6 feet man, those stats are:

1. The distance from sternal notch to relaxed navel - 38.1 cm

2. The distance from relaxed navel to ground - 113 cm

3. The distance from sternal notch to lower end of buttocks - 61 cm

4. The distance from floor to lower end of buttocks - 90.1 cm

The distance from floor to lower end of buttocks is actual leg length (without ankle length). So, 90.1 / 182.88 = 0.4926, closer to ideal leg-to-body ratio.

Also, navel height is 113 cm so when multiplied by 1.618 (golden ratio) it's exactly 182.88 cm.

The distance from relaxed navel height to end of buttocks is 113 - 90.1 = 22.9 cm.

When the relaxed humerus is bent, elbow tip should be at navel level. In this case, the distance from relaxed navel to sternal notch is 38.1 cm and humerus length is 38.2 cm, basically the same.

His head is 22.86 cm tall and the distance from top of head to sternal notch is 182.88 - 151.1 = 31.78 cm.

We can calculate his neck length if we subtract his head length from his total height and then subtract his sternal notch height: 182.88 - 22.86 - 151.1 = 8.92 cm.

We can assume that his total body height without head length is the sum of sternal notch height and neck length which is: 151.1 + 8.92 = 160.02 cm.

His eye level is half of head length: 22.86 / 2 = 11.43 cm. This means that the distance from ground to his eye level is 171.45 cm long.

The most important ratios are:

The ratio of relaxed navel height to the distance from relaxed navel to sternal notch: 113 / 38.1 = 2.9658.

My relaxed navel height is 100 cm and the distance from relaxed navel to sternal notch is 38 cm (in the morning). 100 / 38 = 2.6315. If we assume that the distance from relaxed navel to sternal notch compresses due to spinal shrinkage by about 2 cm at night, then the ratio becomes: 100 / 36 = 2.7777.

As you can see, the perfectly proportioned 6 feet man has the same distance from sternal notch to relaxed navel but 13 cm longer distance from ground to relaxed navel.

Now, remember the distance from relaxed navel to lower end of buttocks? It's 22.9 cm. If we subtract that number from my relaxed navel height of 100, we get: 100 - 22.9 = 77.1 cm. It's very close to my leg length in total, down to mm precision. Thus, my leg-to-body ratio is: 77.1 / 165 = 0.4673.

As you can see, the total leg length of the perfectly proportioned 6 feet man is 90.1 cm while mine is 77.1 cm. Exactly 13 cm difference, which translates to navel height difference 1:1 (Mine is 100 cm and his is 113 cm).

So, to break down the height difference of me (165 cm guy) and perfectly proportioned 6 feet man in body parts:

1. Total leg length and relaxed navel height differences: 90.1 cm vs 77.1 cm and 113 cm vs 100 cm. Exactly 13 cm difference.

2. From sternal notch to relaxed navel: 38.1 cm vs 38 cm. No difference whatsoever. But, we have to assume that my night time value drops by 2 cm at 36 cm due to spinal shrinkage, so 2 cm difference is plausible from this body ratio.

3. Neck length: It's calculated from the distance of sternal notch to chin level. In case of perfectly proportioned 6 feet man it is the following: 182.88 - 151.1 = 31.78 cm. This is the distance from sternal notch to top of his head. Now, we have to subtract his head length: 31.78 - 22.86 = 8.92 cm. This is his neck length.

Now, this is the most interesting. The distance from ground to my relaxed navel is 100 cm and the distance from my relaxed navel to sternal notch is 38 cm (36 cm at night). So, the distance from ground to my sternal notch is 138 cm in the morning and 136 cm at night. The distance from ground to sternal notch of the perfectly proportioned 6 feet guy is 151.1 cm. So, our body height difference (shoulder height) is 13.1 cm in the morning and 15.1 cm at night (13 cm comes from leg length difference, so basically all of the body height difference lies in leg length).

Now, we have to calculate my distance from sternal notch to top of head. 167 - 138 or 165 - 136 (morning and night heights) = 29 cm.

Now, my head length is no less than 23 cm and no more than 24 cm. So, my neck length from sternal notch to chin level is: 29 - 23-24 = no less than 5 and no more than 6 cm.

As you can see, I lose about 3-4 cm of height from neck length compared to perfectly proportioned 6 feet guy (8.92 cm neck length). If our body height difference is just 13.1-15.1 cm (at shoulder level), depending on the time of day, our total height difference is 15.88-17.88 cm depending on the time of day.

So, the difference is 2.78 cm from sternal notch to top of head between me and perfectly proportioned 6 feet guy. If my head length is 23 cm, then he has 2.92 cm longer neck and if my head length is 24 cm, he has 3.92 cm longer neck. All in all, his distance from sternal notch to top of the head is 31.78 cm and mine is 29 cm according to my total height measurement. In total, the difference is 2.78 cm which is significant.

Now, the most important factor when determining the height difference between the two subjects is their eye level. In case of perfectly proportioned 6 feet man, his eye level is half of his head length at 11.43 cm. My eye level is at least 11.5 cm and no more than 12 cm. If a perfectly proportioned 6 feet man is looking at 171.45 cm when he stands erect with 90 degrees head position, I look at 153-153.5 cm at night and 155-155.5 cm in the morning. The difference is: 171.45 - 155 or 155.5 = 16.45 cm or 16.95 cm in the morning and 171.45 - 153 or 153.5 = 18.45 cm or 18.95 cm at night.

As you can see, if I stood in front of perfectly proportioned 6 feet guy at night, his eye level would be at best 18.45 cm or at worst 18.95 cm higher than mine. While our shoulder level difference at sternal notch would be 15 cm only. It means that he gets additional 3.45 cm or 3.95 cm eye level height from neck length alone. 3.45-3.95 cm range is very significant height difference.

Now, the main thing: in order to get the same ratio from ground to relaxed navel to relaxed navel to sternal notch as the perfectly proportioned 6 feet man, I should lengthen my legs with the following in mind:

His ratio of relaxed navel height to the distance of relaxed navel to sternal notch: 113 / 38.1 = 2.9658.

My ratio of the same body measurements: Morning: 100 / 38 = 2.6315; Night: 100 / 36 = 2.7778.

His leg-to-body ratio: 90.1 / 182.88 = 0.4926.

My leg-to-body ratio: 77.1 / 165 = 0.4673.

His leg ratio to his trunk (from lower buttocks to floor): 90.1 / 61 = 1.4770

My leg ratio to my trunk (from lower buttocks to floor): Morning: 77.1 / 61 = 1.2639; Night: 77.1 / 59 = 1.3068.

Leg to trunk ratio is the most important ratio for LL. As you can see, the perfectly proportioned 6 feet man has the distance from floor to lower buttocks of 90.1 cm. If we subtract this number from his sternal notch height: 151.1 - 90.1 = 61 cm. If we add to this number the distance from his sternal notch to top of his head: 61 + 31.78 = 92.78 cm. This is his sitting height.

Now, my measurements for the following: the distance from sternal notch to lower buttocks at night: 59 cm. Sternal notch height at night: 136 cm. Leg length: 136 - 59 = 77 cm. Distance from sternal notch to top of head: 165 - 136 = 29 cm. Sitting height: 165 - 77 = 88 cm.

Now, we have to distinguish the sitting height at top of the head level to sitting height at shoulder level as it's very imporant. As you can see, the perfectly proportioned 6 feet man has a sitting height of 92.78 cm while I at 165 cm have 88 cm (night sitting height). The difference is significant at almost 5 cm BUT (big BUT), my neck length is shorter by about 3-4 cm compared to perfectly proportioned 6 feet man. My distance from sternal notch to top of the head is 29 cm while his is 31.78 cm. 2.78 cm higher.

What matters is sitting shoulder height and not total sitting height. In this case, my sitting shoulder height is 165 - leg length - the distance from sternal notch to top of the head: 165 - 77 - 29 = 59 cm (night sitting height at shoulder level, morning would be 61 cm). The perfectly proportioned 6 feet man has the following: 182.88 - 90.1 - 31.78 = 61 cm.

As you can see, my sitting height at shoulder level is the same in the morning and just 2 cm lower at night.

But, again, the most important factor when evaluating others height is eye level. In this case, the perfectly proportioned 6 feet man has an eye level when sitting at: his eye level when standing - his leg length: 171.45 - 90.1 = 81.35 cm. My eye level when sitting: 153-153.5 - 77 or 155-155.5 - 77 (night and morning values) = 76-76.5 cm at night and 78-78.5 cm in the morning.

Perfectly proportioned 6 feet man has: 81.35 - 76-76.5 = 5.35-5.85 cm higher eye level when sitting at night while my shoulder level is just 2 cm lower than his.

That's why true leg-to-body ratio is not leg length divided by total body height but leg length divided by trunk length as someone might have long neck and long head which might account up to 5 cm height difference from sternal notch to top of the head.

Now, in order to get the same true leg-to-body ratio as perfectly proportioned 6 feet man at night time, I have to lengthen:

Leg length to trunk length ratio of perfectly proportioned 6 feet man: 90.1 / 61 = 1.4770

The distance from ground to relaxed navel to relaxed navel to sternal notch ratio of perfectly proportioned 6 feet man: 113 / 38.1 = 2.9658.

My leg length to trunk length ratio at night: 77 / 59 = 1.3051.

My ratio from ground to relaxed navel to relaxed navel to sternal notch at night: 100 / 36 = 2.7778.

Now, to get the same ratios of the perfectly proportioned 6 feet man:

Leg to trunk length ratio at night: x / 59 = 1.4770. x = 1.4770 x 59 = 87.13 cm. So, I have to lengthen 10 cm in total to get the same leg to trunk length ratio at night time height.

Ratio from ground to relaxed navel to relaxed navel to sternal notch at night: x / 36 = 2.9658. x = 2.9658 x 36 = 106.77 cm. In this case, I have to lengthen about 12 cm in total to get the same ratio as perfectly proportioned 6 feet man.

Now, navel height is variable as well as neck length so we have to lengthen based on first ratio which is total leg length (tiba + femur length) divided by trunk length. Trunk length is total height - distance from sternal notch to top of head - total leg length - outer ankle height (this is on average 7.5-8.0 cm). In my case: 165 - 29 - 77 - 8 = 51 cm (at night). In case of perfectly proportioned 6 feet man: 182.88 - 31.78 - 90.1 - 8 = 53 cm.

Leg-to-body ratio for perfectly proportioned 6 feet man with 53 cm trunk: 90.1 / 53 = 1.7.

My ratio at night time: 77 / 51 = 1.5098.

In order to get 1.7 ratio: x / 51 = 1.7. x = 1.7 x 51 = 86.7 cm.

86.7 - 77 ~ 10 cm. So, I have to lengthen 10 cm in total to get the same leg to trunk length ratio as perfectly proportioned 6 feet man.

If we calculate for morning height: 77 / 53 = 1.4528.

In order to get 1.7 ratio: x / 53 = 1.7. x = 1.7 x 53 = 90.1 cm.

90.1 - 77 ~ 13 cm. So, if I lengthen based on morning height trunk value, I have to lengthen 13 cm in total to get the 1.7 ratio as the perfectly proportioned 6 feet man.

But, morning height is irrelevant as the spine compresses relatively quickly by 1 cm and then goes down by 2 cm so I have to lengthen based on night time trunk height of 51 cm, so 10 cm total leg lengthening.

Now, this is interesting: As my trunk length is just 2 cm shorter at night time compared to perfectly proportioned 6 feet man, my humerus at elbow level is exactly 5 cm higher than my navel when I bend my elbow with relaxed humerus. The perfectly proportioned 6 feet man has his bent humerus at elbow level in parallel to his navel level which is 38 cm from sternal notch. Basically, I have 33 cm humerus so in the morning, my humerus when bent at elbow level is 5 cm higher than my navel and at night it's 3 cm higher.

As you can see, perfectly proportioned 6 feet man has 5 cm longer humerus bone than me and 2.8 cm longer hands (including fingers). This gives him 7.8 cm arm length advantage compared to me, so in total almost 16 cm armspan advantage at the same trunk length in the morning.

So, while my armspan is about 166-167 cm at 165 cm night height with the same trunk length as perfectly proportioned 6 feet man, I have exactly 13 cm shorter legs compared to him. There's no point in not lengthening by about 10-11 cm in total and worry about arm length as my arm and trunk lengths will remain the same, just my leg to trunk ratio will normalize to perfection. My arms will still hang the same way relative to my torso and pelvis so there's no point in worrying about that.

The most important thing is to get the perfect leg to trunk ratio, which is 1.7. Anything above that will create slenderman effect and will be unattractive nked.

I think that 11 cm is optimal for me. 6.5 cm femur and 4.5 cm tibia. It's a pity that I have very short neck and lose about 3-4 cm from that. With this sternal notch height of 136-138 cm (night and morning) my night and morning heights should be at least 167-169 cm if not 168-170 cm. So, at least 2 or 3 cm higher.

But, the most important thing is sternal notch height which is your body height in general. In this case perfectly proportioned 6 feet man is 13 cm taller than me in the morning and 15 cm taller at night (18 cm at night height difference due to longer neck). His sternal notch level is 151.1 cm and mine is 136 cm at night. If I lengthen 11 cm, my sternal notch height will become 147 cm, just 4.1 cm lower than perfectly proportioned 6 feet man. Basically, body height difference will be minimized down to 4 cm and that's what matters for a man, to have a relatively large body at shoulder level.

[cyber_jesus]

fkin nerd

[AnotherLLer]

LOL, I know it's fking autistic to break down body parts and measure them down to mm precision but it's necessary, someone has to do that for the community and I did it. 

[Ted68]

That's cool... for anatomical analysis !

But the real test is on the beach... in swimsuit.
If people look at you like to an alien - its bad.
If women look at you and get wet - its good.

[heightiseverything]

This is the most autistic thing I've ever seen (no offense lol)



(btw 6 ft is never ideal, 6'5 is now according to dating sites.)

[wantingtobetaller]

Man....please do the surgery asap.

[AnotherLLer]

Ted68:

People will assume you're an alien if you exceed perfect leg-to-trunk ratio. Perfect ratio is 1.5138. Leg length is from floor to scrotal line and trunk length is from scrotal line to sternal notch. In my case I have 77 cm legs from floor to scrotal line and 60 cm trunk from scrotal line to sternal notch, so the ratio is 1.2833, which is very low. In order to to get the perfect leg-to-trunk ratio, I have to lengthen according to perfect ratio value, so x / 60 = 1.5138 and x = 1.5138 x 60 = 90.828. I have to lengthen almost 14 cm in total to get the perfect leg-to-trunk ratio and only after 14 cm total LL I will start to deviate from perfect leg-to-trunk ratio and become unattractive.

heightiseverything:

There's no perfect height, there's perfect proportions only and it's 1.5138 when it comes to leg-to-trunk ratio. Any men who will go past that ratio by a lot will look bad at any post LL height and no women will find him attractive solely for his total height. That's why it's very important to learn your body proportions prior to LL to know your limits of lengthening amount.

wantingtobetaller:

I'm going to lengthen 13-14 cm in total, I'm finally 100% sure that I need it in my life. It's a matter of 2 years before I lengthen my tibia first for 6 cm with pure external method and after that I will lengthen my femurs for 8 cm when I get the money for proper internal femurs.

[tilli]

I also find this nerdy and interesting at the same time.
The 4 measurements you mentioned in the beginning ... can you highlight them in the linked graphic maybe?
For instance, how do you calculate 113cm for the navel height?

[AnotherLLer]

Navel height is kinda useless to be honest. It varies depending if you relax your abdomen or tighten it.

The most important proportion for LL is leg-to-trunk (not leg-to-body) ratio. This ratio determines how much can you lengthen until you become uncanny nked.

Leg-to-trunk ratio can be calculated in 2 ways:

1. Measure your sternal notch height from the floor. Then, measure your crotch height from the floor. Subtract your crotch height from sternal notch height. The result is your trunk length. Divide crotch height by trunk height and write down the result.

2. Measure your legs using x-rays (the sum of full lengths of tibia and femur). Measure your sternal notch height from floor. Subtract the leg length you got on x-rays from sternal notch height. The result is your trunk length. Divide your leg length by trunk length and write down the result.

Number 2 is preferred way as it allows to measure your total leg length down to mm precision. Measuring your leg length from floor to crotch is erroneous as it's very hard to know where the middle line of crotch is. But, you can get a good approximation of your leg length nevertheless. IMO you have to measure up to about where your penis begins.

Now, why it's a bad idea to use leg-to-body ratio: neck and head lengths vary a lot even for the same height persons. I myself have 137 sternal notch height while standing at 165 cm tall. This means that the distance from sternal notch to top of my head is 28 cm or something. The distance from sternal notch to my chin is 4-5 cm as my head length is 23-24 cm. Someone at my sternal notch height might be standing at 3-4 cm taller than me due to having longer neck and / or longer head. My neck is short so if I had 2-3 cm longer neck, I would stand at 167-168 cm instead of 165 cm. So, someone at the same sternal notch height might stand 3, 4 or even 5 cm taller due to having longer neck and / or head. That's why it's better to use leg-to-trunk ratio because you want to have your legs in proportion to your trunk length in the end.

As I said earlier, my sternal notch height is 137 cm and my crotch height is about 77-78 cm which should correspond to my tibia and femur lengths of about 35 cm and 43 cm. So, my trunk length is 137 - 77 or 78 = 59 or 60 cm.

The most attractive leg-to-body ratio for males is 0.50. For a 165 cm man who has a sternal notch height of 137 cm, this means that his legs should be 82.5 cm tall (either from floor to crotch or his tibia + femur bones should be 82.5 cm in total). So, his trunk length should be 137 - 82.5 = 54.5 cm. Interestingly, this number is in line of total arm length (excluding hands). Total arm length is the distance from acromion bone to radial bone bump on wrist. It should be about 0.33 of one's total height. My arm length is 72 cm from acromion bone to middle finger and my hand length is 17.5 cm so the distance from acromion bone to radial bump is exactly 54.5 cm but since I have 59-60 cm trunk length and 77-78 cm leg length combination instead of 54.5 cm trunk length and 82.5 cm leg length combination, my arms hang 4.5-5.5 cm higher relative to my crotch.

So, 82.5 / 165 = 0.50 and 82.5 / 54.5 = 1.5138. The latter ratio is more useful as it's the ratio of leg-to-trunk length instead of leg-to-body. So, it's better to lengthen your legs according to the latter ratio.

For me, to reach the perfect leg-to-trunk length ratio, I have to lengthen either 11.5 cm or 14 cm depending if my legs are 77 cm or 78 cm currently. If I go higher than that numbers, every cm will make a visible difference and make me unattractive.

The only issue is arm length as it remains the same after LL but as we know, leg-to-body ratio is more important for attractiveness and IMO after 11.5 cm lengthening, I will look much better than I do now even though I will have the arms made for 165 cm man.

Is arm lengthening necessary? I think that it is not. Since forearm lengthening is a joke and hand lengthening doesn't exist, only humerus can be lengthened. For example, 165 cm man should have about 34.3 cm long humerus while 178 cm man should have 37 cm. The difference is just 2.7 cm but it's a noticeable difference. Does it worth for it for me to lengthen my humerus for about 3 cm if I become 178 cm tall? Now, if it was 100% safe and didn't have radial nerve injury risks and didn't leave scars (internal humerus lengthening has rotator cuff injury chance so it's not worth it) then I might considered it but IMO it's not worth the risks, time, inconvenience and money. After 15+ cm leg lengthening it's another story though.

[tilli]

Yeah still i would have been interested in how you fount out about the 113cm norm? I cannot see that in the image you linked. Not even if i combine certain measurements - but you seem to be the better analyst of us both by far haha

This post is interesting to be since i know i am having a low sitting height of 87.5 with a height of 173. I know it is on the shorter side, if i multiply it by 2 it is 175 so from that perspective it sound ok.
However, if i follow your calculations, and i do have concrete measurements of my femur and tibias already, if i sum them up i am at 89cm already, before leg lengthening. You could even continue calculating the rest of your ratios, but already at this point it is clear that my legs are relatively long already, without LL.
All in all this makes me question if LL is the right thing for me.

I know there are famous people like Henry Cavill out there with crazy proportions, but i am wondering if they would be as extreme as mine.

Plus, this image seems pretty old, maybe even outdated? I don't know, when i look at the measurments of tibias and femur, it almost seems like the image is suggesting the tibias to be longer than the femur? Or is this an optical illusion - i did not measure it. Anyways, we all know that femur is almost always longer than tibias.

If i lengthened 10cm to get to 183 (6 feet), my legs would basically be 99cm long. This could look pretty much off. I mean, i am somewhat muscular and plan to get in shape even more afterwards, but still. I am not sure about that whole thing when thinking about these proportions.

[AnotherLLer]

tilli:

Dude, your legs are already fcking long relative to your total height. 99 / 173 = 0.57 so I can imagine how you look without clothes, LOL. Women should be jealous of you, not kidding.  I'm afraid LL is not for you and you already have an acceptable height so why bother?

Tibia should be about 80% of femur length, so in 45:55 ratio. For example, if my tibia to femur ratio is already 45:55, in order to get the same ratio post double LL of 11.5 cm total, I have to split that 11.5 cm into 45:55 ratio for tibia and femur, respectively. For tibia it is  5.2 cm and for femur it is 6.3 cm. For aesthetics and biomechanics point of view, it would be the best split if one already has 45:55 tib-femur ratio.

[tilli]

Bother because i am in Germany, where the average is quite above my 173cm.
No, my tibias+femurs summed up are currently 89cm. I just said, in case i would lengthen 10cm, to reach the infamous 6 feet in total, i would be at 99cm legs. Which would result in a LBR of 0.54 by the way - which i found to be rated as still attractive, according to some studies, which i could link tomorrow after getting sleep hehe. I know, your argument is to focus on trunk vs legs, makes sense to me. Still, i dont wanna fall into the alien category, how some of you call it here
I guess i will just end up measuring more genetic freaks like Henry these days and then decide. I appreciate your input by the way!

[tilli]

And maybe one more side note, my wingspan is 181cm. So maybe i am just one of those freaks 

[AnotherLLer]

My bad, I read it as 99 instead of 89. 

So, your LBR is 0.514 right now which is already in the perfect zone. After 10 cm you won't be able to tuck in shirts but if you want to be that leggy it's fine, I just don't find it attractive on males and neither the majority of women according to studies. 0.50-0.51 is the perfect LBR for males.

BTW, Henry Cavill has normal trunk size but a little longer legs relative to trunk. He just have short arms and small hands and it's pretty much obvious to anyone with functioning eyes.

[sered22]

I sent you a dm